There's still hope for Dover's waterfront

Saturday

Aug 31, 2013 at 3:15 AMAug 31, 2013 at 6:20 AM

To say there is disappointment with Mark Dickinson's inability to complete Dover's downtown waterfront project on the site of the old city garage is to state the obvious. It should also goes without saying — but we will anyway — that we are disturbed by the way Dickinson has handled his decision to sell Phase I of the project without first consulting city leaders.

All that now written, it is important residents and city officials not lose sight of the prize — the rebirth of a tired and blighted piece of city-owned land, which still holds the potential of jobs and tax dollars.

Dickinson has been a good partner. He has lived up to his commitments and worked closely with city officials when all thought changes to the project might better entice investors. Dover city officials have also acted responsibly each time, doing their due diligence in considering Dickinson's plight — an anemic economy that just won't get out of its own way.

It would now appear, however, that Dover Landing and the city's relationship with Dickinson has come to a critical juncture. Dickinson has surrendered to the financial reality he can't move ahead on his own and is unable to find the appropriate financing to begin construction as originally intended.

His answer is to either sell his business, which would allow the transfer of development rights to a new owner, or get city permission to sell only the rights. His preferred goal is to sell Phase I rights for approximately $4 million. This would allow for the purchase of the land for $1.2 million and pay a remediation cost of approximately $800,000. The remaining monies would be compensation for Dickinson and his company's time and services over six years of work on the development.

There may be a temptation among some city leaders — and some beleaguered taxpayers who were always skeptical — to send Dickinson packing and to start anew.

We don't discount that may have to happen. But it should not be the first choice as Dickinson and the city discuss their options.

Dickinson and the city leaders have done much to lay the groundwork for the project, which includes residential apartments (Phase I) and commercial development. Hearings have been held that would allow permitting to move ahead and a blue print agreed upon between Dickinson and the city.

If at all possible, Dover should consider what is in the best interests of the city and the project. Turned aside should be any notion of starting from scratch, unless all else fails.

In the final analysis we have faith this is what will happen. Dover has proved to be a resilient city. We have lived through and covered many of the more trying times for the Garrison City — mill closures, devastating urban renewal and more recessionary cycles than we care to count.

We hope that this resilience and the ability to look ahead to a better day will guide city leaders as they decide how to deal with Dickinson's desire to find a buyer — in one way or another — for Phase I. Having accomplished that we would then hope Phase II, commercial development, will soon follow.